Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 46

CITY OF C HICAG O

SIXTY-DAY REPORT
ON IMPLEMENTATION
OF EXECUTIVE
ORDER NO. 2019-2

LORI E. LIGHTFOOT
MAYOR OF CHICAGO
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
To the residents of the City of Chicago:

On my first day as Mayor, I signed Executive Order No. 2019-2, which prohibited any City department from deferring to
aldermanic prerogative. What this change means as a practical matter is that while Aldermen will continue to have a
valuable voice in matters affecting their wards, they will no longer have an unchecked veto on any and everything that
goes on in their wards. Many residents both before and after I took office felt great concern about the way in which
certain Aldermen exercised this prerogative and are grateful for the reform.

Although this Order removes aldermanic prerogative from the City departments, it does not remove the role of Aldermen.
The City of Chicago works best when each part of the City—the Mayor’s Office, the departments, and the Aldermen—
work together. That is why the departments have also described how they will continue to solicit and consider the input
of the Aldermen, who should be their community’s most knowledgeable advocates.

Because the Order affects governmental activities across the City, I instructed the departments to prepare a report
detailing the changes made over the past sixty days. Highlights from their reports include:

• Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT): Because of the Order, several CDOT applications, such Divvy
station placements and the Make Way for People Program, now no longer require aldermanic approval to move
forward. CDOT will continue to accept aldermanic input for these programs.
• Department of Cultural Affairs and Special Events (DCASE): Per the Order, DCASE no longer requires aldermanic
approval as part of the application for special events permits. Instead, you can make requests directly to DCASE by
using the permit application available on DCASE’s website or visiting the DCASE office at 78 E. Washington Street.
DCASE will notify Aldermen of applications in their ward and consider their input, but you no longer need the prior
written approval of an Alderman for such events.
• Department of Housing: As a result of the Order, the Department of Housing will no longer require an applicant
to obtain approval from an Alderman to build certain affordable housing developments or to provide financing for
multifamily housing, but the Department continues to invite and consider aldermanic input on these decisions.
• Department of Planning and Development (DPD): Previously, DPD required letters of aldermanic approval for
numerous programs, including issuing grants to small businesses. DPD no longer requires such letters, though
Aldermen may continue to provide input on these processes.
• Department of Streets and Sanitation: Under the Order, Streets and Sanitation will provide ward services more
directly, by delivering garbage carts directly to residences, rather than to ward offices, and by ensuring that tree
removal requests are prioritized by need.
• Department of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection (BACP): City Council approves permits requested by
businesses, such as public way use permits. The Order does not reach those items, but the Mayor’s Office will work
with City Council to improve and streamline these processes to eliminate inefficiencies.

We hope that you find the information in the attached report helpful. You should always feel comfortable bringing
your concerns directly to me and my staff at 312-744-3300 or to your Alderman. Residents can also connect with City
services online, through 311.chicago.gov, or using their phones, through the CHI 311 app.

This report captures the work that the departments completed in the first sixty days after this Order was entered.
However, we will continue to look for additional ways to streamline City services and promote responsive governance,
and I look forward to working in collaboration with the departments, the City Council, and the residents of the City of
Chicago to improve the quality of local government.

Best,

Mayor Lori E. Lightfoot 

2
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2FM.................................................................................... pg. 5
BACP................................................................................. pg. 8
BOE.................................................................................... pg. 9
CACC................................................................................. pg. 10
CCHR................................................................................. pg. 11
CDA.................................................................................... pg. 12
CDOT................................................................................. pg. 13
CDPH................................................................................. pg. 15
CFD.................................................................................... pg. 16
CFO.................................................................................... pg. 17
COPA................................................................................. pg. 18
CPD.................................................................................... pg. 19
CPL..................................................................................... pg. 20
DCASE.............................................................................. pg. 21
DFSS.................................................................................. pg. 22
DHR................................................................................... pg. 23
DOAH................................................................................ pg. 24
DOB................................................................................... pg. 25
DOF.................................................................................... pg. 28
DOH................................................................................... pg. 29
DOIT.................................................................................. pg. 31
DPD.................................................................................... pg. 32
DPS.................................................................................... pg. 38
DSS.................................................................................... pg. 39
DWM.................................................................................. pg. 40
DOL.................................................................................... pg. 41
MOPD................................................................................ pg. 42
OBM................................................................................... pg. 43
OEMC................................................................................ pg. 44
OIG.............................................................................. pg. 45

4
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF FLEET AND FACILITY MANAGEMENT

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Fleet and Facility Management (the “Department” or “2FM”) identified the following practices in
which the Department deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of practice or custom:

The lease of City-owned property (city-as-landlord lease) to a third party. Before getting City Council approval to enter
into a new lease or renew an existing lease, the Department would request a letter of support from the Alderman of the
Ward where the property is located.

The lease of property from a third party for city operations (city-as-tenant lease). Before getting City Council approval to
enter into a new lease or renew an existing lease, the Department would request a letter of support from the Alderman
of the Ward where the property is located.

The purchase of property for City operations. Before getting City Council approval to purchase property for a City
operation, the Department would request a letter of support from the Alderman of the Ward where the property is
located.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Fleet and Facility Management did not identify any decision-making practices in which the
departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required by the Municipal Code of Chicago.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

The lease of City-owned property (city-as-landlord lease) to a third party. When 2FM begins to consider a new lease
or the renewal of a lease for city-owned property to a third party, it will notify the Alderman’s Office via email and
inform them that the Department is considering leasing property to a third-party. The initial notification will include the
information listed below and request input from the Alderman:

1. Type of lease (city as landlord); new lease or renewal


2. Address of city property, approximate square footage to be leased
3. Name of potential tenant
4. Description of the organization
5. Reason for the lease / proposed use for the property
6. Approximate rental rate
7. Term of lease
8. Termination rights

After the lease is negotiated and finalized and ready to be submitted to City Council for approval, the Department
will send a second notice via email to the Alderman for input based on the final negotiated terms of the lease. The
notification will include a summary of the final terms of the lease listed below and request input:

1. Type of lease (city as landlord); new lease or renewal


2. Address of city property, approximate square footage to be leased
3. Name of potential tenant
4. Description of the organization
5. Reason for the lease / proposed use for the property
6. Rental rate

5
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
7. Term of lease
8. Termination rights

The lease of property from a third party for city operations (city-as-tenant lease). When 2FM begins considering a new
lease or the renewal of a current lease from a third party, it will notify the Alderman’s Office via email and inform them
that the Department is considering leasing property from a third party for city operations. The initial notification will
include the information listed below and request input from the Alderman:

1. Type of lease (city as tenant); new lease or renewal


2. Address of leased property
3. Name of property owner
4. Use of space and/or description of City operation requiring the lease
5. Approximate rental rate
6. Capital Costs, if any
7. Term of lease
8. Termination right

After the lease is negotiated and finalized and ready to be submitted to City Council for approval, the Department will
send a second notice via email to the Alderman for input based on the final negotiated terms. The notification will
include a summary of the final terms of the lease listed below and request input:

1. Type of lease (city as tenant); new lease or renewal


2. Address of leased property
3. Name of property owner
4. Use of space and/or description of City operation requiring the lease
5. Rental rate
6. Capital Costs, if any
7. Term of lease
8. Termination right

The purchase of property for City operations: When 2FM begins to consider purchasing property for city operations, it
will notify the Alderman’s Office via email and inform them that the Department is considering the purchase of property
within their Ward for a city operation. The initial notification will include the information listed below and request input
from the Alderman:

1. Address and size of property to be purchased


2. Reason for the purchase including which department requires use of the property and a description of the
department’s use
3. Name of property owner
4. Approximate purchase price, if known

After the terms of the purchase is finalized and ready to be submitted to City Council for approval, the Department
will send a second notice via email to the Alderman for input based on the final negotiated terms. The notification will
include the information listed below and request input from the Alderman.

1. Address and size of property to be purchased


2. Reason for the purchase including which department requires use of property and a description of the
department’s use
3. Name of property owner
4. Purchase price

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

The lease of City-owned property (city-as-landlord lease) to a third party. The Department will notify the Alderman of the
6
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
Ward where the property is located two times during the process, once at the beginning of the process with a new lease
or a lease renewal; and a second time prior to submitting the item for City Council approval. If the Alderman provides
input, the Department will take the information into consideration prior to moving forward with the lease.

The lease of property from a third party for city operations (city-as-tenant lease). The Department will notify the Alderman
of the Ward where the property is located two times during the process, once at the beginning of the process with a
new lease or a lease renewal; and a second time prior to submitting the item for City Council approval. If the Alderman
provides input the Department will take the information into consideration prior to moving forward with the lease.

The purchase of property for City operations. The Department will notify the Alderman of the Ward where the property
is located two times during the process, once in the beginning of the process when a property for purchase has been
identified; and a second time prior to submitting the item for City Council approval. If the Alderman provides input on
the purchase, the Department will take the information into consideration prior to moving forward with the acquisition.

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

No foreseeable obstacles or impediments.

I, David J. Reynolds, the Commissioner of the Department of Fleet and Facility Management, hereby affirm, after careful
review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

7
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AFFAIRS AND CONSUMER PROTECTION (BACP)

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

BACP did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or
practice.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

BACP defers to aldermanic prerogative in the following decision-making processes, as required by Chicago Municipal
Code:

Public Way Use: Sidewalk café permits and public way use permits (signs, canopies, awnings, banners, marquees,
grants of privilege, etc.) are, by Code, required to be approved by City Council via ordinance. BACP reviews and
approves the application, and generates the ordinance for the local Alderman to introduce to City Council. In practice,
BACP seeks the local Alderman’s recommendation as part of the application process.

Alley Access Letters: Motor Vehicle Repair Shops, Day Care Center, Animal Care Facilities, Manufacturing Establishments,
and any Retail Facility over 4,500 square feet are required to provide off-street parking on-site. If access to the requisite
garage or lot is off the alley, access must be granted via an ordinance. In practice, BACP will move the license application
forward upon receipt of an Alley Access Letter from the local Alderman, indicating their intent to introduce the ordinance,
which will authorize the business to use the alley in such a way.

Liquor Moratoriums: Liquor moratoriums are under the exclusive control of the Aldermen. To obtain a liquor moratorium,
the alderman must introduce an ordinance and vote by the full City Council.

Street Peddlers, Mobile Food Vendors, and Shared Housing Units: Alderman have the ability, through ordinance, to
carve out specific areas of within their ward, or the ward as a whole, from certain licensed activities. This has been done
with street peddlers, mobile food vendors, and shared housing units.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Rosa Escareno, the Commissioner of BACP, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are true
and accurate.

8
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
BOARD OF ETHICS
a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Board of Ethics did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Board of Ethics did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Steven I. Berlin, the Executive Director of the Board of Ethics, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents of
the report are true and accurate.

9
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
CHICAGO ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL
a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Kelley A. Gandurski, the commissioner or chief executive of the Chicago Animal Care and Control, hereby affirm, after
careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate

10
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
CHICAGO COMMISSION ON HUMAN RELATIONS
a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Mona Noriega, the commissioner or chief executive of the Chicago Commission on Human Relations, hereby affirm,
after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

11
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Jamie L. Rhee, the commissioner or chief executive of the Chicago Department of Aviation, hereby affirm, after careful
review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

12
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Transportation identified the following practices in which the department deferred to aldermanic
prerogative as a matter of custom or practice:

Issuance of Right of Way Adjustments: If the Department of Transportation determines that a street or alley should be
vacated, dedicated, granted an easement, or granted right of way to open or close to vehicular traffic and conferred to
a property owner for a better purpose, then the Department required the applicant to obtain a letter of support and an
ordinance introduction by the alderman in the ward in which the street or alley resides.

Determination of a Make Way for People Program application: The Make Way for People Program promotes pedestrian-
friendly streets and plazas. When the Department of Transportation receives an application for the Make Way for
People Program the Department required the applicant to obtain a letter of support from the alderman in the ward
where the project location resides.

Determination of Divvy Station Locations: When the Department of Transportation considers a new Divvy Station
location, the Department required signed approval from the alderman in the ward where the location resides.

Issuance of Block Party Permits: When the Department of Transportation issues a block party permit, the Department
required the applicant apply through the alderman in the ward where the applicant and the requested permit location
resides. The alderman’s office would then submit the application for the requestor.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

Acknowledgment of Alley Access Driveway: According to MCC Chapter 10-20-435, prior to the Department of
Transportation acknowledging permission for an alley access driveway for a lot or garage larger than six parking
spaces, an applicant must receive an ordinance introduction and receive approval from the full City Council.

Adding or Moving Bus Stands, Taxi Stands or Horse Stands: According to MCC Chapter 9-64-140, prior to the Department
of Transportation adding or moving a bus, taxi, or horse stands, must receive an ordinance introduction and receive
approval from the full City Council.

Installation of a Sign to indicate Street Direction Change: According to MCC Chapter 9-20-010, prior to the Department
of Transportation installing a sign to indicate a street direction change, the code requires an ordinance introduction and
receive approval from the full City Council.

Issuance of a Street Speed Limit Change: According to MCC Chapter 9-12-070, after the Department of Transportation
has studied and proposed a speed limit change on a Chicago street, the code requires an ordinance introduction and
receive approval from the full City Council

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

Issuance of a Right of Way Adjustments: The Department of Transportation no longer requires an applicant for a right
of way adjustment to obtain a letter of support from the alderman of the ward in which the property is located. The
Department revised its right of way adjustment application to remove the requirement for a letter of support from an
alderman. Additionally, the right of way adjustments memorandum was revised to reflect that Alderman “introduce” the
ordinance.

13
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
Determination of a Make Way for People Program: The Department of Transportation no longer requires an applicant
for a Make Way for People Program to obtain a letter of support from the alderman of the ward in which the public way
is located. The Department revised its Make Way for People Program application to remove the requirement for a letter
of support from an alderman.

Determination of Divvy Station Locations: The Department of Transportation no longer requires signed approval from
the alderman of the ward in which the Divvy station would be located. The Department revised its Divvy station location
packet and removed the requirement for signed approval from an alderman.

Issuance of Block Party Permits: The Department of Transportation will not alter the block party permit process until the
Department, the Mayor’s Office, and Department of Law can establish a new block party permit ordinance.

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

Issuance of a Right of Way Adjustments: The Department of Transportation notifies via memorandum an alderman of
the ward of an application for a right of way adjustment. The notification includes the applicant’s name and contact
information. The Department also requests that the alderman provide information based on the alderman’s analysis
of any relevant factors. This feedback will be provided in the application and the ordinance introduction for full City
Council approval.

Determination of a Make Way for People Program: The Department of Transportation notifies via memorandum an
alderman of the ward in which the property resides regarding applications for the Make Way for People Program. The
notification includes the applicant’s name and contact information. The Department also requests that the alderman
provide information based on the alderman’s analysis of any relevant factors into the application.

Determination of Divvy Station Locations: The Department of Transportation notifies via memorandum an alderman of
the ward in which the location resides regarding new Divvy station locations. The Department also requests that the
alderman provide information based on the alderman’s analysis of any relevant factors into the application.

Issuance of Block Party Permits: The Department of Transportation will continue to issue Block Party permits by requiring
applicants apply through the alderman in the ward where the applicant and the requested permit location resides. The
alderman’s office then submits the application for the requestor. The Department, the Mayor’s Office, and Department
of Law are investigating and developing a new Block Party permit ordinance.

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Tom Carney, the Acting Commissioner of Department of Transportation, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the
contents of the report are true and accurate.

14
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Allison Arwady, Acting Commissioner of the Chicago Department of Public Health, hereby affirm, after careful review,
that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

15
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
CHICAGO FIRE DEPARTMENT

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Chicago Fire Department considers aldermanic input any time there is a request to issue a permit for fireworks
displays.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

Code Provision 15-20-240 Fireworks Display in Public Places


Code Provision 2-36-430 Agreements to use buildings for training

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

Code Provision 15-20-240 Fireworks Display in Public Places - The Chicago Fire Department considers aldermanic
input any time there is a request to issue a permit for fireworks displays.
Code Provision 2-36-430 Agreements to use buildings for training - This is rarely invoked

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

No

I, Richard C. Ford II, the commissioner or chief executive of the Chicago Fire Department hereby affirm, after careful
review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

16
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer identified commercial loading zone (CLZ) conversions. The City Council passed
an ordinance giving the Comptroller the ability to convert traditional loading zones to commercial loading zones (CLZ). It
has been the practice of the CFO’s office to consult with the Aldermen before the CLZ is installed. The Aldermen often
deny proposals from the CFO’s office for reasons unknown.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any decision-making practices in which departmental deference to aldermanic
prerogative was required by the Municipal Code.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

The Office of the CFO will no longer defer to aldermanic vetoes over CLZ decisions.

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

When the Office of the CFO is considering converting an area to a CLZ, it will notify the alderman of the affected ward.
The alderman can provide input on the CLZ decision, but the department shall not be bound by that input.

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Jennie Bennett, the Chief Financial Officer, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are true
and accurate.

17
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
CIVILIAN OFFICE OF POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Sydney R. Roberts, the commissioner or chief executive of COPA, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents
of the report are true and accurate.

18
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Eddie Johnson, the superintendent of the Chicago Police Department, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the
contents of the report are true and accurate.

19
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
CHICAGO PUBLIC LIBRARY

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Andrea Telli, the commissioner or chief executive of the Chicago Public Library, hereby affirm, after careful review, that
the contents of the report are true and accurate.

20
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS AND SPECIAL EVENTS

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Cultural Affairs and Special Events has identified the following practices in which the department
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice:

Issuance of a Special Event Permit: When the Department of Cultural Affairs and Special Events issues a special event
permit, the Department required the applicant to obtain a letter of approval from the alderman in the ward in which the
proposed event takes place. And, if applicable, acknowledge the intent to sell alcohol.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Cultural Affairs and Special Events did not identify any decision-making practices in which the
departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required by the Municipal Code of Chicago.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

Issuance of a Special Event Permit: The Department revised its special event permit application and resource guide by
removing any language declaring the requirement for a letter of approval for a special event.

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

Issuance of a Special Event Permit: The Department of Cultural Affairs and Special Events notifies an alderman via
email of all permit applications for special events in his/her ward. Aldermen receive a copy of all event applications as
part of a city review group and are encouraged to provide any input into the permit application via email to the Deputy
of External Events and Event Applicants.

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

None.

I, Mark Kelly, the commissioner or chief executive of the Department of Cultural Affairs and Special Events, hereby
affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

21
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY & SUPPORT SERVICES

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Lisa Morrison Butler, the commissioner or chief executive of the Department of Family & Support Services, hereby
affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

22
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Soo Choi, the commissioner or chief executive of the Department of Human Resources, hereby affirm, after careful
review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

23
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

Department of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) did not identify any practices in which DOAH deferred to aldermanic
prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

DOAH did not identify any practices in which DOAH deferred to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Patricia Jackowiak, the commissioner or chief executive of Department of Administrative Hearings, hereby affirm, after
careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

24
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative that is not
otherwise required by the Municipal Code of Chicago.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did identify the following practices in which the Department defers to aldermanic prerogative either
directly or via City Council action or inaction. As the City recently enacted new Administrative Provisions of the Chicago
Construction Codes (new Title 14A) that took effect on July 1, 2019, our response is broken out into post-July 1, 2019 and
pre-July 1, 2019.

Post-July 1, 2019

DOB Direct

1. Section 13-20-680 requires that a Council Order is required for any sign permit issued by the Department for a
sign that exceeds 100 square feet in area or exceeds 24 feet above grade. Section 13-20-680 further requires
the permit applicant to submit a copy of the respective sign permit application directly to the Alderman of the
ward that the perspective sign would be located. It has been the practice of City Council to defer to the local
Alderman as to whether the Council would approve or deny the proposed Council Order.

2. Section 17-9-0118-F requires that an applicant for a wireless communication facility provide the Alderman of the
ward where the proposed facility will be located with a copy of the building permit application and drawings at
least 10 days prior to filing the building permit application. Although this is only an Aldermanic notice provision
is does create a de facto 10 day hold process on the DOB permit which could impact the issuance of a DOB
building permit. (Note: In the new Title 14Athe City Council removed the Aldermanic notice provisions formerly
in Title 13 but did not amend Title 17 as there are additional steps to amending Title 17. DOB would have no
objections to the City amending the notice provisions in Title 17.)

DOB Indirect - Where the issuance of a DOB permit is contingent on the issuance of a permit by another department.

1. Section 10-28-010 requires that building-related features, such as signs, bay windows, balconies or awnings,
that extend over the public way obtain a public way use permit issued by BACP. Section 10-28-015 in turn
requires BACP to tender a copy of the application to the Alderman of the ward where the public way use would
be located and further requires a Council Ordinance for BACP to issue a public way use permit. It has been the
practice of City Council to defer to the local Alderman as to whether the Council would approve or deny the
proposed Council Order. A DOB permit will be held-up if the BACP public way use permit has not been issued.

2. Section 10-20-405 requires that a public way use permit from CDOT be obtained for a new curb-cut driveway.
Section 10-20-415 further requires CDOT to tender a copy of the public way use application within 20 days to
the Alderman of the ward where the public way use would be located. Unlike the BACP public way use permit,
the CDOT public way use permit does not require action by the City Council. However, as the location of the
driveway is an integral aspect of the building design the DOB building permit cannot be issued without prior
issuance of the CDOT public way use / driveway permit. Although this is only an Aldermanic notice provision
is does create a de facto 20 day hold process on the CDOT public way use permit which could impact the
issuance of a DOB building permit.

3. Section 10-20-150 requires that a public way work permit from CDOT be obtained for the installation or relocation
of a utility pole. Section 10-20-150(h) further requires CDOT to tender a copy of the public way work application
within 30 days to the Alderman of the ward where the public way work of installing or relocating a utility pole be

25
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
located. Unlike the BACP public way use permit the CDOT public way work permit does not require action by
the City Council. However, as the location or relocation of the utility may be necessary for the construction of a
new building lacking adequate utility poles or where a pole needs to be relocated for a proposed new driveway,
the public way work permit is an integral aspect of the building design the DOB building permit cannot be
issued without prior issuance of the CDOT public way work permit. Although this is only an Aldermanic notice
provision is does create a de facto 20 day hold process on the CDOT public way work permit which could
impact the issuance of a DOB building permit.

4. Various sections of Title 17 require the Zoning Administrator to provide prior notice to the Alderman of the ward
where the respective action would occur. All of these notice provisions could delay the issuance of a DOB
building permit.

- Section 17-13-0107 requires the Zoning Administrator to provide at least 10-day notice to the
Alderman of the ward prior to acting on an application for a zoning administrative adjustment.

- Section 17-13-1003-AA requires the Zoning Administrator to provide at least 10-day notice to the
Alderman of the ward prior to acting on an application for a zoning administrative adjustment on
frontage requirements on private streets.

- Section 17-10-0102-B incorporates the above at least 10-day notice to the Alderman of the ward
zoning administrative adjustment procedure for the approval of a parking adjustment in excess of
50% in transit-oriented developments.

- Section 17-15-0302-B incorporates the above at least 10-day notice to the Alderman of the ward
zoning administrative adjustment procedure for the approval of a substitution of a nonconforming
use.

In the new Title 14A the City Council removed the Aldermanic notice provisions formerly in Title 13 but did not amend
Title 10 or 17 covering other departments. DOB would have no objections to the City amending the Aldermanic notice
provisions in Titles 10 and 17.

Pre-July 1, 2019

The old Chicago Building Code used to require Aldermanic permission or Aldermanic notice in the following instances,
however all of the below were repealed as part of the new Title 14A, effective July 1, 2019. As a matter of courtesy,
Aldermen continue to receive nightly e-mailed reports of building permits applied for and issued in their respective
wards and have access to a password-protected website to access the data which is contained in the nightly reports.

Section 13-32-030 required DOB to provide 10-day notice to the Alderman of all permit applications in their
respective ward, with very limited exceptions, and the permit would not be valid unless said notification was
provided. This Section was repealed effective July 1, 2019 and replaced with the new Section 14A-4-401 which
contains no Aldermanic notice requirement.

Section 13-20-090 required that any DOB permit for a mechanical amusement riding device by accompanied
by a letter of permission from the Alderman of the ward where the device was to be located. This Section was
repealed effective July 1, 2019 and replaced with the new Section 14A-4-404.11 which contains no Aldermanic
permission requirement.

Section 13-96-470(b) required DOB to provide the Alderman of a tent permit applications in their respective
ward within 3 days of receipt of the application and a requirement that DOB take no action for 5 days after
forwarding the application to the Alderman. The Section further empowered the Alderman to refer the
application to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks and Building Standards for a public hearing. This Section
was repealed effective July 1, 2019 and replaced with the new Section 14A-4-405 which contains no Aldermanic
notice requirement or ability to refer for a public hearing.

Section 13-124-390 required the permittee to provide at least a 30-day notice to the Alderman before

26
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
commencing any excavation work in their respective ward. This Section was repealed effective July 1, 2019
and replaced with the new Section 14A-4-406 which contains no Aldermanic notice requirement.

Section 13-124-015 required the permittee to provide at least a 10-day notice to the Alderman before commencing
any demolition work in their respective ward. This Section was repealed effective July 1, 2019 and replaced with
the new Section 14A-4-407 which contains no Aldermanic notice requirement.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

As mentioned in (a) above, the Department is implementing the new Title 14A, which removed the Aldermanic notice
provisions from the old Chicago Building Code. The new Title 14A went into effect on July 1, 2019.

Under the new Title 14A, the Municipal Code no longer requires applicants to submit an Aldermanic Acknowledgement
Letter where the applicant desired to obtain a permit within the 10-day Aldermanic notice period as that 10-day
Aldermanic notice period is no longer in the Municipal Code of Chicago. Likewise, the Department no longer requires
proof from the permit applicant or permittee of Aldermanic notice for tent, excavation, mechanical amusement riding
devices or demolition permit applications or work as those Aldermanic notification provisions were repealed by the new
Chicago Building Code effective July 1, 2019. The Department is continuing to update numerous forms, explanatory
documents, and computer systems that refer to this former requirement.

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

The Department continues to welcome input from the community and Aldermen. As in the past, the Department notes
that permits are issued pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code of Chicago and that the Department will issue
the permit where the permit application complies with the provisions of the Municipal Code of Chicago. The Department’s
aldermanic liaison, Earnestine Black, remains the primary point of contact for ward offices to receive information about
permits, applications and code violations. The Department’s senior leadership team is also available to respond to
aldermanic questions. Ms. Black maintains a log of aldermanic inquiries that are sent to her or to department employees
other than the senior leadership team (the Commissioner, Deputy and Assistant Commissioners).

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

The Department sees no obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

I, Judith Frydland, the commissioner of buildings, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are
true and accurate.

27
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Finance identified several practices in which departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is
required by the Municipal Code of Chicago:

Disabled parking permit: A resident seeking a disabled parking permit submits an application to DOF. CDOT then
performs a parking study to determine whether the applicant has alternative parking options. The results of the study
are submitted to the alderman and the applicant. The alderman can override DOF’s recommendation.

Industrial permit parking: If an alderman submits a petition from businesses to the DOF requesting a parking study,
CDOT will conduct a survey of street parking to determine whether industrial permit parking is appropriate. The results
of the study are submitted to the alderman. The alderman can override DOF’s recommendation.

Residential permit parking: If an alderman submits a petition from residents to the DOF requesting a parking study,
CDOT will conduct a survey of street parking to determine whether residential permit parking is appropriate. The
results of the study are submitted to the alderman. The alderman can override DOF’s recommendation.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Reshma Soni, the commissioner or chief executive of the Department of Finance, hereby affirm, after careful review,
that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

28
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING (DOH)

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Housing identified the following practices in which the department deferred to aldermanic prerogative
as a matter of custom or practice:

ARO Hardship Request: A developer may seek approval of a hardship from the DOH Commissioner when their ARO
plan does not meet program requirements. DOH requires a letter of support from the local alderman in order to issue
approval.

ARO Off-Site Unit Application: The ARO requires DOH approval of ARO required affordable units to be built at a location
other than the development site (“off-site units”). DOH requires a letter of support from the local alderman in order to
issue approval for the off-site units.

City Lots for Working Families (CL4WF): CL4WF provides vacant, city-owned lots to developers of affordable single-
family homes and two-flats. The application checklist requires a letter of support from the local alderman, which is
included with the IGA ordinance package.

MF Financing Application: The MF Finance application (for City tax credits, bonds, loans, or grants for multifamily rental
projects) checklist requires a letter of support from the local alderman, which is required for the IGA ordinance package.

Parade of Homes – Request for Qualifications (RFQ) market rate: The City identifies a series of vacant lots, convenes
homebuilders, and then constructs and markets new single-family homes. This process requires a letter of support from
the local alderman.

Preserving Communities Together (PCT): PCT facilitates the rehabilitation of vacant and abandoned properties.
Applicants make requests to the City to acquire and fix up properties. DOH requires a letter of support from the local
alderman to approve an applicant’s request.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

DOH did not identify any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is
required by the Municipal Code of Chicago.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

ARO Hardship Request: DOH will no longer require a letter of support.

ARO Off-Site Unit Application: DOH will no longer require a letter of support.

City Lots for Working Families (CL4WF): DOH will no longer require a letter of support.

MF Financing Application: DOH will no longer require a letter of support.

Parade of Homes – Request for Qualifications (RFQ) market rate: DOH will no longer require a letter of support.

Preserving Communities Together (PCT): DOH will no longer require a letter of support.

In addition, requirements for aldermanic letters of support are being removed from program applications, instructions

29
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
and checklists.

DOH is currently developing a set of objective criteria to determine whether to approve applications for the above listed
programs.

Finally, the Executive Order requires the department to memorialize all aldermanic input received by the department.
In cooperation with the Department of Planning and Development, DOH has deployed a temporary system for tracking
all such aldermanic input via a Microsoft Access database.

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

ARO Hardship Request: After DOH receives an ARO hardship request, it will notify the alderman of the ward where the
development is located and consider a letter of input if provided, but will not be bound by that letter.

ARO Off-Site Unit Application: After DOH receives an application to construct units off-site, it will notify the alderman of
the ward where the development is located and consider a letter of input if provided, but will not be bound by that letter.

City Lots for Working Families (CL4WF): After DOH receives an application under the CL4WF program, it will notify the
alderman of the affected ward and consider a letter of input if provided, but will not be bound by that letter.

MF Financing Application: After DOH receives an application under the MF Financing program, it will notify the alderman
of the affected ward and consider a letter of input if provided, but will not be bound by that letter.

Parade of Homes – Request for Qualifications (RFQ) market rate: After DOH receives an application under the Parade
of Homes program, it will notify the alderman of the affected ward and consider a letter of input if provided, but will not
be bound by that letter.

Preserving Communities Together (PCT): After DOH receives an application under the PCT program, it will notify the
alderman of the affected ward and consider a letter of input if provided, but will not be bound by that letter.

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

DOH has not identified any obstacles to implementation of the Executive Order.

I, Marisa Novara, the Commissioner of the Department of Housing, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents of
the report are true and accurate.

30
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Carleton Nolan, the Acting Commissioner or Chief Executive of the Department of Innovation and Technology, hereby
affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate

31
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT (DPD)

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The following DPD programs historically have involved aldermanic involvement as a matter of practice or policy:

$1 Large Lots: DPD sells city-owned residentially zoned property to property owners for $1. The local alderman reviewed
a list of eligible properties prior to advertising and a list of eligible applicants if there was a need for a lottery, which
occurs when there are multiple applicants for one property. An alderman could remove a lot from the program at any
time and for any reason.

Class L tax incentive application: Cook County offers the Class L property tax incentive, which encourages property
owners to preserve eligible landmark properties. DPD confirmed support from the local alderman prior to the Commission
on Chicago Landmarks consideration of a resolution in favor of the application and required a letter of support from the
local alderman prior to City Council introduction.

Demolition applications required to be reviewed by DPD: The owner of a landmark structure may apply for a permit
to demolish a portion or the entirety of the structure. Prior to making any recommendation, DPD provided e-mail
notification to the local alderman. For those going to Landmark Commission, DPD notified the local alderman. If City
Council approval was required, DPD required a letter of support prior to City Council.

Land Sale – Adjacent Neighbors Land Acquisition Program (ANLAP): ANLAP permits owners of property adjacent to
City-owned land to purchase the land from the City. DPD requested a letter of support from the local alderman prior to
taking an ANLAP sale to Project Roundtable, which is part of DPD’s internal approval process. DPD required a letter of
support prior to City Council introduction.

Land Sale – Negotiated Sale: The Negotiated Sale program enables qualified individuals or entities to purchase vacant
or improved properties that are owned by the City. DPD requested a letter of support from the local alderman prior
to taking a Negotiated Sale to Project Roundtable, which is part of DPD’s internal approval process, the Community
Development Commission and the Chicago Plan Commission. DPD required a letter of support prior to City Council
introduction.

Landmark designation: Pursuant to MCC § 2-120-630 et seq., the City Council may, upon the recommendation of the
Commission on Chicago Landmarks, designate buildings and other structures as Chicago landmarks. DPD required a
letter of support from the local alderman prior to City Council introduction.

Landmark permit fee waiver application: Under the Municipal Code of Chicago, an owner of landmark structures may
apply for a waiver of fees associated with rehabilitation of the structure, which must be approved by City Council. DPD
required a letter of support from the local alderman prior to City Council introduction.

Neighborhood Opportunity Fund: The Neighborhood Opportunity Fund (NOF) provides financing to businesses in
designated areas of the City’s south and west sides for projects. DPD obtained verbal approval from the local alderman
for NOF projects under $250,000, which do not require City Council approval, and required a letter of support from the
local alderman for NOF projects over $250,000, which do require City Council approval.

Open Space Impact Fees—Expenditures: Open space impact fees are collected on new developments for use in
acquiring and developing new open space. Expenditures of fees require City Council approval. DPD required a letter of
support from the local alderman prior to City Council introduction.

Other land sales: sealed bid, broker sales: A sealed bid sale offers City-owned land to any person or entity through
a competitive bid process. Third-party brokers are sometimes used to help facilitate the sale of select City-owned
properties. DPD required a letter of support from the local alderman prior to City Council introduction.

32
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
Planned Developments – Lapse: MCC § 17-13-0612-E provides that if a planned development lapses under MCC § 17-
13-0612-A (meaning that no construction, as authorized by a building permit, commences within 6 years of the PD’s
approval by City Council), the Zoning Administrator “must” initiate a zoning map amendment to rezone the property
back to the prior zoning classification. MCC § 17-13-0612-B allows for a one year extension of the PD. In practice, the
Zoning Administrator often did not initiate a zoning map amendment unless the local alderman requested that the
Zoning Administrator file for the amendment.

Plans for Chicago Plan Commission (CPC) adoption: DPD develops community plans in targeted Chicago neighborhoods.
DPD required a letter of support or otherwise confirmed support from the local alderman prior to placing any plan on
the Chicago Plan Commission’s agenda for consideration.

Small Business Improvement Fund (SBIF) - Funding requests: The Small Business Improvement Fund (SBIF) program
uses Tax Increment Financing (TIF) revenues to help owners of commercial and industrial properties within specific
TIF districts to repair or remodel their facilities for their own business or on behalf of tenants. DPD required a letter of
support from the local alderman prior to introduction of a SBIF funding request to City Council.

Special Service Areas (SSA): Special Service Areas are local tax districts that fund expanded services and programs
through a localized property tax levy within contiguous areas. SSA Commissioners provided a letter of support from the
local alderman as a part of their application for appointment, which DPD accepted and forwarded to the Mayor’s Office.
DPD required a letter of support from the local alderman for each yearly SSA budget prior to City Council introduction.

Tax incentives (Class C, 6b, 7): DPD administers a variety of tax incentives allowed by Cook County. DPD required a
letter of support from the local alderman prior to City Council introduction.

TIF RDA: DPD enters into redevelopment agreements related to projects pursuant to which the City finances the project,
in whole or in part, using available Tax Increment Financing. DPD required a letter of support from the local alderman
prior to the Community Development Commission hearing on the proposed redevelopment agreement, as well as for
all other legislative action.

TIF designation: Pursuant to the requirements of state law, the City Council may designate an area as a Tax Increment
Financing district. DPD required a letter of support from the local alderman prior to the Community Development
Commission hearing on the proposed redevelopment agreement, as well as for all other legislative action.

Type 1 Zoning Amendments—modifications: MCC § 17-13-0310 requires that once a Type 1 application is approved, no
permits may be issued except those that the Zoning Administrator determines to be in strict compliance with the density
shown on the development plan approved by the City Council and in “substantial compliance” with the setbacks, floor
area ratio, parking and building height shown on the development plan that was approved by the City Council. Proposals
to make substantial modifications to City Council-approved development plans must be processed in accordance with
the Zoning Map Amendment procedures of Sec. 17-13-0300. In practice, the Zoning Administrator typically consults with
the local alderman prior to allowing a modification.

Type 1 Zoning Amendments—Lapse: MCC § 17-13-0311 requires that except in a “D” zoning district, a building permit
must be obtained within 2 years of the effective date of a Type 1 Zoning Map Amendment and if such permit has not
been obtained, the Zoning Administrator “must” initiate a zoning map amendment to rezone the property back to the
prior zoning classification. In practice, the Zoning Administrator often did not initiate a zoning map amendment unless
the local alderman requested that the Zoning Administrator file for the amendment.

Neighborhood Opportunity Bonus--Adopt-A-Landmark: The Adopt-A-Landmark fund provides financing for rehabilitation
projects to buildings and other structures designated as a Chicago landmark. Once DPD selected a project for funding,
DPD notified the local alderman prior to posting the project on the Commission on Chicago Landmark’s agenda.

Permit Review Committee for Landmarks: An owner of a property designated as a Chicago landmark may file a permit
application to alter or modify the landmarked structure, which is heard by the Permit Review Committee (PRC) of the
Commission on Chicago Landmarks. DPD notified the local alderman prior to posting the application on the Committee’s
agenda and often reviewed the proposed alteration with the local alderman prior to the PRC meeting.

33
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
90-Day Demolition Delay for red and orange-rated buildings: Pursuant to the Chicago Landmarks Ordinance, MCC §
2-120-580 et seq., a permit application to demolish a building that is rated “red” or “orange” in the Chicago Historic
Resources Survey cannot be granted for a period of up to 90 days to allow the City time to determine whether to seek
landmark designation for the structure. DPD notified the local alderman upon receipt of demolition application. The
alderman was able to request release of the hold earlier than 90 days.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

A. Amendments to DPD Practices and Policies


Upon issuance of the EO, the Department undertook a review of its programs to determine which had practices and
policies that involved aldermanic prerogative. After an exhaustive investigation, and in consultation with the Mayor’s
Office, DPD determined that the programs outlined above in Part II involved some level of aldermanic prerogative. In
most instances, the aldermanic prerogative came in the form of a letter of aldermanic support that DPD required before
it would advance a matter either internally or to the City Council for its consideration. Once DPD identified which of
its programs involved aldermanic prerogative, it amended the policies and practices governing those programs to
eliminate aldermanic prerogative. Those amendments are detailed below.
$1 Large Lots: DPD will remove aldermanic ability to unilaterally remove a lot from the program and will no longer
require a letter of support.

Class L tax incentive application: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Demolition applications requiring review by DPD: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Land Sales – Adjacent Neighbors Land Acquisition Program: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Land Sales – Negotiated Sale: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Landmark designation: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Landmark permit fee waiver application: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Neighborhood Opportunity Fund: DPD will eliminate the practice of obtaining verbal approval for NOF projects under
$250,000. DPD will no longer require a letter of support for projects over $250,000.

Open Space Impact Fees—Expenditures: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Other land sales: sealed bid, broker sales: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Planned Developments—Lapse: The Zoning Administrator will begin initiating zoning map amendments if a permit is not
obtained within the date defined by the ordinance.

Plans for Chicago Plan Commission (CPC) adoption: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Small Business Improvement Fund (SBIF) funding requests: DPD will no longer require a letter of support for funding
requests going to City Council.

Special Service Areas: DPD will no longer require a letter for support for SSA Commissioner appointment or for SSA
budgets.

34
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
Tax incentives (Class C, 6b, 7): DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

TIF RDA: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

TIF designation: DPD will no longer require a letter of support.

Type 1 Zoning Amendments—modifications: The Zoning Administrator will end the practice of consulting with the local
alderman prior to approval of modifications in substantial compliance.

Type 1 Zoning Amendments—Lapse: The Zoning Administrator will end the practice of waiting for direction before
seeking a zoning map amendment.

The EO also requires DPD to memorialize in writing all aldermanic input DPD receives. After issuance of the Executive
Order, DPD developed a temporary system for tracking all input. On July 19, 2019, DPD announced to all staff that all
aldermanic input will be tracked using a Microsoft Access database created specifically for that purpose. The following
graphic represents the fields that DPD staff will use in recording all instances of aldermanic input:

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

In response to the Executive Order, DPD established set points for Aldermanic notification and a subsequent period of
time for aldermen to provide any input they would like DPD to consider. The aldermanic notification points for DPD’s
programs are detailed below. The notification point and input period are the minimum points of contact; DPD fully
anticipates and welcomes dialogues with aldermen as they determine whether—and what—input to provide to DPD.

$1 Large Lots: DPD will engage in planning to better determine lot eligibility and will solicit input from the local alderman

35
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
of each affected ward once a preliminary list of lots is available to help ensure that the lots are suitable for the program.
DPD will notify the local alderman prior to seeking City Council authority to sell a lot.

Class L tax incentive application: DPD will notify the local alderman at the point of application. DPD will solicit input from
the local alderman early in the process and update the local alderman before City Council introduction.

Demolition applications requiring review by DPD: DPD will notify the local alderman at the point of initial review. The
local alderman may provide an optional input letter. DPD will further notify the local alderman before City Council
introduction or consideration by the Commission on Chicago Landmarks Commission.

Land Sales – Adjacent Neighbors Land Acquisition Program: DPD will notify the local alderman at the point of application
review. The local alderman may provide an optional input letter. DPD will further notify the local alderman before City
Council introduction.

Land Sales – Negotiated Sale: DPD will notify the local alderman at the point of application review. The local alderman
may provide an optional input letter. DPD will further notify the local alderman prior to Chicago Development Commission,
Chicago Plan Commission and before City Council introduction.

Landmark designation: DPD will notify the local alderman of the initiation of the landmark designation process. The local
alderman may provide an optional input letter. DPD will further notify the local alderman before City Council introduction
of the designation.

Landmark permit fee waiver application: DPD will notify the local alderman of its intention to support a permit fee waiver
at the time of application. The local alderman may provide an optional input letter. DPD will further notify the local
alderman before City Council introduction.

Neighborhood Opportunity Fund: DPD will notify the local alderman of any applications it receives (regardless of the
dollar amount of the project). The local alderman may provide an optional input letter. For grants under $250,000, DPD
will further notify the local alderman at the time the grant is awarded. For grants over $250,000, DPD will notify the
local alderman prior to City Council introduction. DPD will develop a notification process to all aldermen of applications
under review.

Open Space Impact Fees—Expenditures: DPD will provide notification to the local alderman of the consideration of an
upcoming expenditure. DPD will also notify any additional aldermen in the community area. The notified aldermen may
provide an optional input letter. DPD will further notify the local alderman prior to City Council introduction.

Other land sales: sealed bid, broker sales: DPD will notify the local alderman at the point of application review. The local
alderman may provide an optional input letter. DPD will further notify the local alderman before City Council introduction.

Planned Developments—Lapse: The Zoning Administrator will notify the local alderman upon initiation of a zoning map
amendment.

Plans for Chicago Plan Commission (CPC) adoption: DPD will notify the local alderman before placing a plan on the
Chicago Plan Commission’s agenda. The local alderman may provide an optional input letter.

Small Business Improvement Fund (SBIF) funding requests: DPD will notify all aldermen with portions of the affected
TIF over 7% when DPD is considering submitting a funding request to City Council. The local aldermen may provide an
optional input letter. DPD will further notify the affected aldermen prior to City Council introduction. DPD will continue to
notify the local alderman (post-award) of which businesses within their ward are receiving SBIF funding.

Special Service Areas: Aldermen are free to continue to nominate SSA Commissioners and can provide input into the
process. DPD will provide notification to the local alderman when it receives an application for SSA Commissioner.
For SSA budgets, DPD will provide notice of an SSA budget to the local alderman upon receipt. The local aldermen
may provide an optional input letter for both Commissioner appointments and SSA budgets. DPD will provide further
notification to the local alderman prior to City Council introduction for either SSA appointments or budgets.

36
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
Tax incentives (Class C, 6b, 7): DPD will notify the local alderman of applications received by DPD. The local alderman
may provide an optional input letter. DPD will further notify the local alderman before City Council introduction.

TIF RDA: DPD will notify the local alderman of applications received by DPD. The local alderman may provide an optional
input letter. DPD will again notify the local alderman prior to the matter being placed on the agenda of the Community
Development Commission (CDC). DPD will additionally notify the Committee on Finance prior to CDC introduction, and
to the extent Finance holds an aldermanic briefing, DPD would be in attendance to answer questions. DPD will further
notify the local alderman before City Council introduction.

TIF designation: DPD will notify the local alderman of plans to seek a TIF designation. The local alderman may provide
an optional input letter. DPD will again notify the local alderman prior to the matter being placed on the agenda of the
Community Development Commission. DPD will additionally notify the Committee on Finance prior to CDC introduction,
and to the extent Finance holds an aldermanic briefing, DPD would be in attendance to answer questions. DPD will
further notify the local alderman before City Council introduction.

Type 1 Zoning Amendments—modifications: The Zoning Administrator will process applications for changes. For those
changes that are deemed to be in substantial compliance, the Zoning Administrator will notify the local alderman of
the approval of the change. All proposals to make substantial modifications will continue to be approved by the City
Council, and the Zoning Administrator will notify the local alderman at the time of the proposal.

Type 1 Zoning Amendments—Lapse: The Zoning Administrator will begin initiating zoning map amendments if a permit
is not obtained within the date defined by the ordinance. The Zoning Administrator will notify the local alderman at the
time of initiation of a zoning map amendment.

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Eleanor Gorski, the Acting Commissioner of the Department of Planning & Development, hereby affirm, after careful
review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

37
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF PROCUREMENT SERVICES

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Shannon Andrews, the commissioner or chief executive of the Department of Procurement Services, hereby affirm,
after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

38
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF STREETS AND SANITATION

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Streets and Sanitation identified the following practices in which the department deferred to
aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice:

Discretionary Tree Removals: Since 1990, Aldermen have been granted the removal of 20 live trees per ward at their
request.

Black Garbage Carts: The Department received requests from Aldermen for black garbage carts to be delivered directly
to their office and/or that cart deliveries in their ward would be prioritized.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department of Streets and Sanitation did not identify any decision-making practices in which the departmental
deference to aldermanic prerogative is required by the Municipal Code of Chicago.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

Discretionary Tree Removals: All discretionary tree removals will now be considered on a case by case basis. There is
no longer a pre-determined number of live trees allotted for removal in each ward.

Black Garbage Carts: All black garbage carts will be delivered directly to the requesting residence.

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

Discretionary Tree Removals: Aldermen will continue submitting request forms outlining the justification for each
removal request which will be followed by an inspection by the Department’s Bureau of Forestry. Direct requests from
Aldermen will also be tracked electronically.

Black Garbage Carts: All black garbage carts will be entered into the CSR system. The Department requests Aldermanic
input in emergency cases where residents do not have black garbage carts due to theft or damage. All direct requests
from Aldermen will be tracked electronically in addition to the CSR system.

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

The Department of Streets and Sanitation did not identify any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation
of this executive order.

I, John Tully, the Commissioner of the Department of Streets and Sanitation hereby affirm, after careful review, that the
contents of the report are true and accurate.

39
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF WATER MANAGEMENT

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Randy Conner, the commissioner or chief executive of the Department of Water Management, hereby affirm, after
careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

40
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
DEPARTMENT OF LAW

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the Department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the Department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Mark A. Flessner, Corporation Counsel, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and
accurate.

41
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
MAYOR’S OFFICE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Karen Tamley, the commissioner or chief executive of the Mayor’s Office for People With Disabilities, hereby affirm,
after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

42
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
OFFICE OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT (OBM)

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Office of Budget and Management (OBM) identified the following practice in which the department deferred to
aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice:

The Department of Fleet and Facility Management (2FM) and the Department of Transportation (CDOT) frequently
petition TIF Task Force for TIF funding approval associated with 2FM or CDOT projects. Depending on the aldermen
involved, and the impacted TIF, the Mayor’s Office previously requested that 2FM/OBM or CDOT/OBM confer with
an alderman. Aldermen either opposed proposals, provided verbal approvals, or provided letters of support. In some
instances, an alderman was asked to confer with another alderman who might share a TIF.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

OBM did not identify any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is
required by the Municipal Code of Chicago.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

OBM will request that aldermen work directly with impacted departments on any proposed TIF uses. OBM will not
require a letter of support from an alderman for any proposed TIF-funded projects that are in the alderman’s ward.
OBM will inform the departments from which requests for TIF funding originate (particularly CDOT, 2FM, Housing, and
DPD) that they should provide an alderman with notice when that department is considering requesting TIF funding
for a project located in the alderman’s ward. OBM will request that the impacted department notify the alderman if the
project has received TIF funding.

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

OBM will request that aldermen work directly with impacted departments on any proposed TIF uses.

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Susie Park, the OBM Budget Director, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and
accurate.

43
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Richard Guidice, the commissioner or chief executive of the Office of Emergency Management and Communications,
hereby affirm, after careful review, that the contents of the report are true and accurate.

44
C I T Y O F C H I C AG O • S I X T Y DAY R E P O R T
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

a. Any and all historical decision-making practices, identified by the department, in which the department has
deferred to aldermanic prerogative as a matter of custom or practice, but which deference is not otherwise required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

b. Any decision-making practices in which the departmental deference to aldermanic prerogative is required
by the Municipal Code of Chicago;

The Department did not identify any practices in which the department defers to aldermanic prerogative.

c. All steps the department took to enact the mandate of this Order, including but not limited to changes to
forms, revisions to instructions for approval, establishment of maximum time periods by which a proposal must be
approved or denied, or establishment of fact-based, objective criteria by which decisions should be made;

N/A

d. A description of how the department henceforth receives and considers aldermanic input in its revised
decision-making practice; and

N/A

e. Any obstacles or impediments to the prompt implementation of this executive order.

N/A

I, Joe Ferguson, the chief executive of the Office of the Inspector General, hereby affirm, after careful review, that the
contents of the report are true and accurate.

45